Delete Audio Isolation History Item. Deletes a specific audio isolation history item and the associated media files.
Bulk support: accepts history_item_ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | ||
| history_item_id | Yes | ||
| history_item_ids | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Description states the tool deletes an item and associated media files, but annotations set destructiveHint=false, contradicting the description's explicit destructive behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is compact and front-loaded; the first sentence mostly restates the tool name, but the bulk-support sentence adds meaningful information without fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a deletion tool with no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and misleading annotations, the description omits return behavior, idempotency/irreversibility, and relationship to the required history_item_id field.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the description only explains history_item_ids for bulk use; it does not clarify history_item_id or account, leaving three parameters under-documented.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description uses specific verb 'deletes' and explicit resource 'audio isolation history item' plus 'associated media files', making the operation unambiguous and distinct from sibling delete tools such as elevenlabs_delete_speech_history_item.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The bulk support note ('accepts history_item_ids for batched execution') gives some usage context, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or comparison to alternative delete endpoints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.